Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3

 PC
User Score
3.1

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 5706 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1,201 out of 5706
  2. Mixed: 740 out of 5706
  3. Negative: 3,765 out of 5706
Buy Now
Buy on

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. Valleymsx
    Nov 8, 2011
    7
    I thought it was impossible to screw further the MW series after MW2. Oh boy, was I wrong. MW3 doesn't even look like MW2, it looks uglier. It takes skill to mess up a game like that. Hell, even the music from the lobby is a cheap ass soundtrack from a 70thies Chuck Norris movie. Really, Zero as score is still overestimating. Pathetic.
  2. marqpas
    Nov 20, 2011
    7
    MW1 was great, MW 2 a bit less great, and MW3 a bit less great. Still a nice game if you've never played MW before. This is more of a nice expansion to MW2 really. Not worth the full game's price or title.
  3. zaninif
    Nov 12, 2011
    7
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I agree with some of the criticism offered by some users. Yes, MW3 doesn't feel like a new game: it's more like an expansion pack for MW2. Yes, the graphics don't look that great for a game released in 2011. Yes, the gameplay is not innovative, but this is not necessarily a bad thing: both MW2 and its carbon copy MW3 have great gameplay. I have only 2 issues with MW3: 1) US$ 60 for a MW2 expansion pack (i.e., MW3) is a rip-off, and 2) despite of my system configuration (I7-2600, GTX-580, 8GB RAM, Creative Labs Titanium discrete audio card, 25Mbps/25Mbps broadband), the game lags too much when I happen to be the host (MW2 had the same problem due to P2P). These are the only 2 reasons for me to give it a 7 out of 10. Another thing: If IW ever releases a paid Elite service for PC, just pass - it's not worth 50 bucks.… Expand
  4. hugamuga
    Nov 8, 2011
    7
    If you are new to the call of duty this is a fantastic game, 5 years of gradual improvements have led to the most refined iteration of the series, although the graphics are somewhat lacking in to comparison to battlefield 3, they are perfectly adequate for the smaller indoor settings with are synonymous with call of duty. multiplayer offers many improvements over the previous modernIf you are new to the call of duty this is a fantastic game, 5 years of gradual improvements have led to the most refined iteration of the series, although the graphics are somewhat lacking in to comparison to battlefield 3, they are perfectly adequate for the smaller indoor settings with are synonymous with call of duty. multiplayer offers many improvements over the previous modern warfare including the return of dedicated servers and even LAN support which is becoming rarer and rarer in modern PC games, the improvements to the kill-streak system are great and overall the game feels more fluid then past call of duty's. singleplayer follows the same formula that has been successful in the past games, and while the story isn't a masterpiece it is defiantly fun and the fast paced scripted campaign is well refined. spec ops returns and once again it includes a great variety of missions in which there is some very well designed 2 player coop, survival mode is also enjoyable but gets boring pretty fast. whether this game is worth buying or not will depend, technically the game is not a huge improvement on previous call of duty's and if you have modern warfare 2, you will probably find it hard to justify the $100us (in Australia) buying price on steam which is quiet frankly ridiculous. but if you are new to the series i would recommend this game as it offers the most refined version of what is, technically a very decent first person shooter.… Expand
  5. MrHuk
    Nov 10, 2011
    7
    MW3 feels slicker than MW2 and nearly all 16 maps are great, the new games modes add some freshness to the series and they're enjoyable to play with friends. MW3 feels like a fixed version of MW2 and that's not a bad thing, but the price should have reflected that, £40 for a glorified expansion is a little much. The main negative right now are once again the matchmaking on PC,MW3 feels slicker than MW2 and nearly all 16 maps are great, the new games modes add some freshness to the series and they're enjoyable to play with friends. MW3 feels like a fixed version of MW2 and that's not a bad thing, but the price should have reflected that, £40 for a glorified expansion is a little much. The main negative right now are once again the matchmaking on PC, it still picks bad hosts and it still puts me with foreigners instead of other Brits. Matchmaking with dedicated servers would be perfect, like what is used in Left 4 Dead. Another problem is hackers, I've only seen a few but there's no way to report them like their is on console.… Expand
  6. raspuzan
    Nov 11, 2011
    7
    Not so bad as people are saying... With the financial security they have could be a lot better though. I think the engine should be different from the mw2 but it´s almost the same with only minor changes. The story is great!
  7. davenbettridge
    Nov 13, 2011
    7
    The Call of Duty creators must be criticized for having the greatest opportunity in the industry with unlimited resources to only coming up with a half good product. CoD is value for money but is lacking in original creativity. The special Ops is well done, the story pretty much sucks (no excuses - it sucks and you have brain damage if you think it's a good story), and the multiplayer isThe Call of Duty creators must be criticized for having the greatest opportunity in the industry with unlimited resources to only coming up with a half good product. CoD is value for money but is lacking in original creativity. The special Ops is well done, the story pretty much sucks (no excuses - it sucks and you have brain damage if you think it's a good story), and the multiplayer is the same as ever with little innovation. I do recommend MW3 due its surface fun and value for money but it lacks to what should have been something much much more.… Expand
  8. Hemi
    Nov 18, 2011
    7
    This game is exactly what I expected it to be. Not ground breaking but still a solid COD title. As far as initial releases go, there have been few problems. The lobby system has been moderately improved in that your entire party leaves lobbies/games together when initiated by the lobby leader. Unfortunately the hackers were present within 48 hours of release. Hopefully Valve will do aThis game is exactly what I expected it to be. Not ground breaking but still a solid COD title. As far as initial releases go, there have been few problems. The lobby system has been moderately improved in that your entire party leaves lobbies/games together when initiated by the lobby leader. Unfortunately the hackers were present within 48 hours of release. Hopefully Valve will do a better job of providing a cheat free environment than they did with MW2. The single player campaign is exactly what you'd expect, albeit kind of short. But since I'm a 98% MP player I feel I'll ge my $60.00 worth out of this game, whether or not I'll turn it into a $90 game via DLC as I did with MW2 is currently undecided, but I doubt I will.… Expand
  9. wing0zero
    Nov 8, 2011
    7
    Not as bad as a zero but not a ten also, Single player ties the story up and is ok but not worth £40 if all your doing is single player. Multiplayer will give you enough hours of fun though and from what i have played so far it seems good, yeah it's like MW2 but what do all expect all FPS games are the same... point, shoot, kill is BF3 any different at the core?

    But yeah i    Not as bad as a zero but not a ten also, Single player ties the story up and is ok but not worth £40 if all your doing is single player. Multiplayer will give you enough hours of fun though and from what i have played so far it seems good, yeah it's like MW2 but what do all expect all FPS games are the same... point, shoot, kill is BF3 any different at the core?

    But yeah i still play MW1 and BF 1942 (DC Mod rules!!)    … Expand
  10. Amarula
    Nov 8, 2011
    7
    Do not innovated anything. Except in merchandise! The producer could invest more into the coop and multiplayer! Thanks for the excellent hihistória certainly worth a hollywood movie! I hope that the franchise is renewed! Graphics similar to the previous engine and identical!
  11. Alcapwn
    Nov 9, 2011
    7
    As far as FPS games go I've played the CoD series almost exclusively over the years logging in literally thousands of hours. Anyone should know before buying this game that you aren't paying $60 USD for a single player game. That being said, it is still frusturating to see them using the same engine with the same outdated graphics over and over. But, as a wise man once said, "if it ain'tAs far as FPS games go I've played the CoD series almost exclusively over the years logging in literally thousands of hours. Anyone should know before buying this game that you aren't paying $60 USD for a single player game. That being said, it is still frusturating to see them using the same engine with the same outdated graphics over and over. But, as a wise man once said, "if it ain't broke don't fix it." Or something like that. There is a reason this is the most popular shooting game in history. There is a reason that 90% of the reviewers who gave this game a score of zero are probably online right now trying to get the next unlock for their weapons. It is a quick, simple, fun to play game that will bring me hours of enjoyment over the next year. So here it is:
    7/10
    -1 for crap singleplayer mode THAT WE ALL KNEW WAS GOING TO HAPPEN.
    -1 for seriously outdated game engine. (Mark my words they will have a new engine next year)
    -1 for no ranked dedicated servers on the PC. (Lobbies? Intermissions? WTF that's lame.)    … Expand
  12. Her3tiK76
    Nov 9, 2011
    7
    I think we should all leave out the SP in modern FPS. Devs decided that having internet means we don't want SP or even Co-op for some reason. I guess i belong to the few that i wasn'r expecting anything more,i am pleased with the game but as a PC gamer i really can't understand the fact that the in-game server browser has only unranked games. -1 for this. Aesthetically nothings changed,allI think we should all leave out the SP in modern FPS. Devs decided that having internet means we don't want SP or even Co-op for some reason. I guess i belong to the few that i wasn'r expecting anything more,i am pleased with the game but as a PC gamer i really can't understand the fact that the in-game server browser has only unranked games. -1 for this. Aesthetically nothings changed,all icons flags/arrows w/e are the same as before. Yes,i would love even the illusion that somethings different from previous games. -1 All maps are small.Good cause it gives little room for camping (even if i think the term is invalid...) and makes game more high paced but still,a couple bigger maps would add variety and thats always good i think. Still there are many maps so... +1 New additions like "Kill confirmed" are great,new perks etc.All good there. Still it feels more like an upgrade,nothing more. I'm not demanding so this is ok for me,not in that price tag though. -1 for what the game offers in that price… Expand
  13. darth3pio
    Nov 20, 2011
    7
    The game in and of it's self is solid, but there is still an apparent lack of innovation, the campaign as always, pretty epic, but the multiplayer really doesn't add anything new, if anything it takes features that were established in Black Ops, a currency based staggered unlock system meant you could unlock what ever you felt fit your play style straight away, rather than waiting for it.The game in and of it's self is solid, but there is still an apparent lack of innovation, the campaign as always, pretty epic, but the multiplayer really doesn't add anything new, if anything it takes features that were established in Black Ops, a currency based staggered unlock system meant you could unlock what ever you felt fit your play style straight away, rather than waiting for it. The PC release is rather sloppy, bugs plague it, we get stuck with IWnet if we want to earn those shiny unlocks, it's pretty poor. While these things can be added down the track, I'm not entirely sure it will happen if only because in 12 months time a new Call of Duty will hit store shelves and they will want us to fork out another $100 minus cost of DLC. If pricing wasn't so terrible in Australia I wouldn't complain, but I would like to get my moneys worth out of a game not feel ripped off.… Expand
  14. 410MaXiMuS
    May 31, 2012
    7
    When it comes to competative multiplayer, I'm much more of a Battlefield guy. But when it comes to singleplayer, MW3 wins. I also enjoy the Spec Ops and survival mode, but nothing beats zombies. So I still play Black Ops for that.
  15. alekgub
    Nov 10, 2011
    7
    I've finished both bf3 and cod mw3. In my opinion both games aren't special. Bf 3 has excellent graphics but campaign lacks good action, on the other hand mw3 graphics sucks but single mode is quite fun. Campaign last around 6h and it's good conclusion for hole series.
  16. ProfessorKanel
    Nov 10, 2011
    7
    A good action filled game. Not much have changed since Modern Warfare 2, but the campaign is as amazing as the ones in the first two games. Have not played multiplayer. If you are only interested in multiplayer and own another Call of Duty game from the last few years you will not find much value in this game.
  17. Marcusghost
    Nov 13, 2011
    7
    COD MW3 it´s not a bad game, but only if you don´t have MW2 or black ops, for the type of game it´s overpriced, maybe 40 dollars will be a more realistic price for this game.
  18. Cyph0n
    Nov 11, 2011
    7
    No game can get a 0, however bad it is. I am aware that BF3 is a superior game when it comes to MP, but MW3 certainly does not deserve a 0, or a 3 for that matter, because of such a silly reason.

    I haven't played MW3 yet, but according to what sense I've read, the campaign is decent, and the multiplayer is basically the same as it used to be. Still, whoever bought MW3 should have seen    No game can get a 0, however bad it is. I am aware that BF3 is a superior game when it comes to MP, but MW3 certainly does not deserve a 0, or a 3 for that matter, because of such a silly reason.

    I haven't played MW3 yet, but according to what sense I've read, the campaign is decent, and the multiplayer is basically the same as it used to be. Still, whoever bought MW3 should have seen this coming. Since the beginning of the "CoD revolution", little has changed. The core gameplay has remained the same, and most importantly, the MP has seen only minor changes. So, instead of wasting your time ruining MW3's Metacritic score for no justifiable reason, play some BF3 and enjoy yourself, because extreme prejudice isn't going to get you anywhere.    … Expand
  19. Draum
    Nov 11, 2011
    7
    It's a great game, or better, DLC. They are only selling a DLC with a price game. Campaign very exciting, but there's nothing revolionario, same graphics, the sound can not help but compare with BF3, BF3 is that the more real. Is it worth buying when the price down, or have a good promotion on Steam.
  20. glennfetherston
    Jan 3, 2012
    7
    I enjoyed the single player and i think they rapped up the modern warfare story line quite well.I have not spent much time with the multiplayer but from what i have played it looks like more of the same. I like the cod multiplayer but i feel like the multiplayer has not really changed from mw2 apart from a few tweaks. i still think survival is fun though
  21. zeroy
    Nov 14, 2011
    7
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. SP: This was for me the primary reason to get MW3 in the first place and I can now say I am on the fence on this one. On the plus side the Level design and general scripting is overall top notch with some serious creativity when it comes to the underwater level or the airplane sequence. I actually felt bad for whoever designed the Paris level as i can see how nicely detailed and close to the real thing it is but the level is such that the player just dont get to see anything, it goes so fast! Iâ… Expand
  22. frast
    Jan 3, 2012
    7
    And finally came the long-awaited FPS, competitor BF3. The campaign may appeal to many but for me, however, is worse than in the previous sections. Cool story shows less and no longer makes such entertainment. I really like the introduction of special missions and survive so that our enjoyment of the game takes longer. Multiplayer, however, for it is the same as in previous parts of soAnd finally came the long-awaited FPS, competitor BF3. The campaign may appeal to many but for me, however, is worse than in the previous sections. Cool story shows less and no longer makes such entertainment. I really like the introduction of special missions and survive so that our enjoyment of the game takes longer. Multiplayer, however, for it is the same as in previous parts of so many of you may not like it. For me, the new call is a really good game but the only good ... My rating 7.5… Expand
  23. Evoxstar
    Nov 14, 2011
    7
    I think the game is good...it´s SP-Story is great but it has some Online troubles...
    I had to reinstall the game twice...
    It takes AGES for me to get in a normal TD game as in 80 % of the cases i get a timeout... My friend has the same problems on hes Playstation. I dont like Battlefield and I dont like a comparison. I have BF Bad Company 2 here ... its story is okay and    I think the game is good...it´s SP-Story is great but it has some Online troubles...
    I had to reinstall the game twice...
    It takes AGES for me to get in a normal TD game as in 80 % of the cases i get a timeout...
    My friend has the same problems on hes Playstation.
    I dont like Battlefield and I dont like a comparison.
    I have BF Bad Company 2 here ... its story is okay and online its a big piece of **** in my opinion...
    I will always stay with COD!!
    Fix those timeout problems and everything is okay!!!!    … Expand
  24. IguanasSmegma
    Nov 14, 2011
    7
    Let's begin this review with the positive content. The games looks nice, the storytelling as always is pretty good, captain price is a strong character, nice graphics despite the same engine, but with this consoles generation is all they can do, a console port. But still, the graphics looks pretty good in a medium/high end rig.

    Negative points. If you put IMAGE QUALITY on EXTRA as always    Let's begin this review with the positive content. The games looks nice, the storytelling as always is pretty good, captain price is a strong character, nice graphics despite the same engine, but with this consoles generation is all they can do, a console port. But still, the graphics looks pretty good in a medium/high end rig.

    Negative points. If you put IMAGE QUALITY on EXTRA as always been pretty good graphics, the graphics gets worse, so you do have to change for NATIVE, to get a better quality.

    Makarov should be more badass, we see him just a few moments in the game, and despite the storytelling is pretty good is more the same. MULTIPLAYER= This is really pissed me off, CHEATERS everywhere, they know where you are, I've got a guy in my team, who had 122/5 in a 12 players TDM in less than 2 min, this is just impossible.

    The multiplayer should be better, with some real improvments as Veihicles and that sort of thing, I know COD is more Frag, but , still, we need at least a real helicopter experience, we saw this pretty good in BLACK OPS single campaign. So why they keep avoiding to using this in Multiplayer. Is the consoles limit?

    So I think for the Single Player campaign the game deserves 8.0 and for the Multiplayer if they take care of cheaters 8 as well if not, I'm gonna give a circular ZERO.    … Expand
  25. TingPing
    Nov 16, 2011
    7
    It's a solid game with the strongest singleplayer of the entire series with some amazing moments and decent visuals for the ageing engine. Coop is solid with survival mode and spec op missions. The multiplayer maybe more of the same but thats not a bad thing as the majority still love it.
  26. IIMurphaII
    Nov 24, 2011
    7
    I have never really been a follower of the Call of Duty games; Back in the day, it was Medal of Honor or nothing, but since EA managed to practically destroy that series, like they did with many others (think C&C), I have been forced to look elsewhere. So here I am at Modern Warfare 3. Because I am somewhat lazy, I am just going to create a list of some dot-points.

    *It's the first COD    I have never really been a follower of the Call of Duty games; Back in the day, it was Medal of Honor or nothing, but since EA managed to practically destroy that series, like they did with many others (think C&C), I have been forced to look elsewhere. So here I am at Modern Warfare 3. Because I am somewhat lazy, I am just going to create a list of some dot-points.

    *It's the first COD game I have played competitively online and I am enjoying the experience; aside from some bugs. One thing that does annoy me is that there is no big maps, so you are usually forced to use close-to-medium range guns. I can also understand why IW didn't change the multiplayer experience too much - it would have alienated the fan base. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it", comes to mind here.

    *I do agree with most people here - the engine for this game is aging too much. Sure it has improved slightly over each game, but no matter how many labels IW slaps on the engine, its still the same thing. "No matter how much you polish turd...". The colours are dull and washed out, textures are flat and low resolution, shadows are horrible, the foliage does not look great, and the overall definition of the game ain't there. It's time for a new engine - one that actually looks decent on a 1080p screen.

    *Let's be honest here, I didn't buy COD for the campaign, so I don't care how mediocre it may seem, but as long as there is one I am not fussed. The storyline itself was extremely short and full of almost every cliche known to man. One big Hollywood explosion-fest. Where are the war games that actually make you feel the real emotions of war and the morals behind it all? A game that really makes you think about your actions or question what is happening in front of you. I know it might be hard to portray in an interactive media like games, but I'm sure its probably not entirely impossible.

    To sum it up, future COD games need a new engine, better story lines, and more map sizes and varieties. I'm not saying it has to compete with BF3 in terms of gameplay, like most people here ( That would be like comparing apples to oranges. One game offers large-scale multilayer with vehicles, the other is more like a death match arena game), it just has to improve it's core - what made it great in the first place. My decision to purchase Modern Warfare 3 was simple; I haven't owned a COD game before, and wanted to experience what the fuss was all about by purchasing the latest installment. I couldn't really careless about the previous games (although I did like World at War).

    And about he contrasting scores here on Metacritic - it was insane what the critics rated the game, I don't think it deserves that high of a score. As for the user reviews, most are people who compare it to BF3 or who feel betrayed, let-down, or conned by IW/Activision by not delivering a game that lives up to its very own hype, or the users own expectation. At the end of the day, who is more likely to voice their opinion? Someone who has something positive to say, or someone who has something negative to say?    … Expand
  27. OmnipotentPrime
    Nov 19, 2011
    7
    As most Launch titles are these days they always require a bit of patching. A lot of the Imbalance in MW2 was eliminated by Nerfing and Removing certain elements, but compensated by the extra perks, point streaks and Unorthodox Maps. Gameplay still retains it's tradition with a few new extras.
    Love the idea with having Both Matchmaking and Dedicated Servers but disappointed on not being    As most Launch titles are these days they always require a bit of patching. A lot of the Imbalance in MW2 was eliminated by Nerfing and Removing certain elements, but compensated by the extra perks, point streaks and Unorthodox Maps. Gameplay still retains it's tradition with a few new extras.
    Love the idea with having Both Matchmaking and Dedicated Servers but disappointed on not being able to use console commands.

    In my Opinion Activision Should Follow the Paths of Blizzard and Valve Alike, Make only a few games and patch them on a regular basis. But when Money is involved i dnt think thats going to happen Overall An Ok game at that, might wait till it's ben patched a bit better.    … Expand
  28. Travo
    Nov 20, 2011
    7
    This game, like the other Call of Duty games is a lot of fun and it is probably actually worthy of an 8.5-9 score. However for people who fork out money on these call of duty games each time they are released will see it differently because it is practically the same thing over and over. To someone who is new to call of duty they will love this game but for those who are familiar with theThis game, like the other Call of Duty games is a lot of fun and it is probably actually worthy of an 8.5-9 score. However for people who fork out money on these call of duty games each time they are released will see it differently because it is practically the same thing over and over. To someone who is new to call of duty they will love this game but for those who are familiar with the franchise will feel like they have been robbed and like myself will feel that they have purchased a glorified map pack or DLC. If the reviews and ratings of a game are an influence in some gamers decision to buy a game, and therefore the sales numbers will encourage developers to continue recycling their old games then i think its a bit of a 'slap in the face' to those who have supported the franchise.… Expand
  29. thejuggernaut94
    Nov 20, 2011
    7
    Singleplayer was nowhere near the standards of Black Ops, I'll give Treyarch that. However, the survival mode is a completely new experience, bar the copy and pasted textures from mw2 and cod4. Undoubtedly, everyone gets this game for the multiplayer, and to me they didn't do as great a job on the level design, but the balance has actually been better. Sometimes, you get the occasionalSingleplayer was nowhere near the standards of Black Ops, I'll give Treyarch that. However, the survival mode is a completely new experience, bar the copy and pasted textures from mw2 and cod4. Undoubtedly, everyone gets this game for the multiplayer, and to me they didn't do as great a job on the level design, but the balance has actually been better. Sometimes, you get the occasional cheap weapon that sprays you down and makes you rage for a good 5 minutes but that's not to say that the fun you get out of the game actually overpowers the anger. Who cares if the graphics are the same though, if it ain't broke don't fix it. Although many of you would like to see an improvement, I actually do not mind. In my personal opinion not having dedicated servers doesn't matter. The matchmaking system allows you to play with your friends in a party and find other players within your area providing you with usually consistent ping. I'm pretty sure alot of these reviews are coming from BF3 fanboys, so I wouldn't personally trust them...… Expand
  30. Litho
    Nov 20, 2011
    7
    Nothing new but still fun, same game as MW1-2 so single player is fun but not going to change the world of gaming. Graphics looks slightly better than MW1-2 but is quite dated now (especially compared to BF3). Multiplayer is still as fun as ever - only real complaint (other than lack of ranked dedicated servers) is all maps have been shrunk so no need to use anything other than an smg.Nothing new but still fun, same game as MW1-2 so single player is fun but not going to change the world of gaming. Graphics looks slightly better than MW1-2 but is quite dated now (especially compared to BF3). Multiplayer is still as fun as ever - only real complaint (other than lack of ranked dedicated servers) is all maps have been shrunk so no need to use anything other than an smg. MW1-2 had a few more open maps which where annoying with snipers but did mix the gameplay up. So perfect if u like to run and gun/spray and pray all other game play is pretty useless now. Fun game but nothing new (which isn't bad, just means I'm less likely to come back to the series next time).… Expand
prev
Page:

Awards & Rankings

59
#59 Best PC Game of 2011
4
#4 Most Discussed PC Game of 2011
27
#27 Most Shared PC Game of 2011

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
78

Generally favorable reviews - based on 26 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 19 out of 26
  2. Mixed: 7 out of 26
  3. Negative: 0 out of 26
  1. Computer Games Online RO
    Apr 10, 2012
    82
    Thus, I can't recommend buying this unless you (still) like the fast pace, the customizable weaponry and the short matches, of about 10 minutes each. With the very important mention that, essentially, nothing has changed.
    Read full review
  2. LEVEL (Czech Republic)
    Jan 20, 2012
    80
    Stunning campaign with epic moments makes this third installment of Modern Warfare a great show with the best approach to players. No need to mention an excellent multiplayer. [Dec 2011]
  3. PC PowerPlay
    Jan 9, 2012
    50
    If you own any previous COD, there's little reason to buy MW3. [Jan 2012, p.50]
See all critic reviews »